So, the essence of your complaint with my posts is that I am wasting valuable Internet space by stating the obvious. Things like this is clearly a biased marketing thread and that no real data has been presented. Guilty as charged I suppose.

I'm on the fence about the fuel upgrade as well so it seems we are in the same boat. Did you know that the only other fuel upgrades out are inherently flawed, won't work, and that this solution flows 25% more than they do anyway?

Nope. That's not the essence. If you had a purpose for being here, and if you were interested in the product at hand (or, if you were certain that another product is superior), you would be precise in what it is you want to know. Stating that a salesman is biased is unproductive and brings no new information to the table. What do you ask of a salesman if you are interested in their data? You make your posts concise and ask specifically what you want. You wouldn't be siphoning intent from the sales pitch. What standard are you holding people to? Make yourself clear.

As I've asked in this thread already and that no one has directly answered: What data is specifically desired that would satisfy your need for information (which is a perfectly valid need to have.) What quality of data would be satisfactory to you (you're asking for "real" data)? Do you want screenshots of data logs? I get the impression that you are not, at all, interested in the product, and merely want to bash the maker of the product for marketing the product.

Your last sentence is trolling and is simply unnecessary, and you know it. I do know that my standard LPFP cannot keep up with the flow of 100% E85, and, even if I could get it to, it would wear out the component much faster. I have seen this first hand with my car. Running a secondary pump in series would reduce the load that the LPFP has to endure, and would reduce the likelihood of cavitation in the fuel lines, as well as make the LPFP last longer. As I've requested in my first post: what is it I am missing? How am I being scammed or misled? Moreover, what data do you bring to the table that directly counters this product? If you had come on and said "While I understand that this solution works, I feel it is unnecessary/expensive because (alternate method/alternate data)" then that's fine! I'm sure he'll address your concerns, much like he has done already. If you want some real data on top of that, then I'm sure being specific about what you want will go leaps and bounds further than tautologies (a salesman is being a salesman?)

As I've requested in my first post: what is it I am missing? How am I being scammed or misled? Moreover, what data do you bring to the table that directly counters this product? If you had come on and said "While I understand that this solution works, I feel it is unnecessary/expensive because (alternate method/alternate data)" then that's fine! I'm sure he'll address your concerns, much like he has done already. If you want some real data on top of that, then I'm sure being specific about what you want will go leaps and bounds further than tautologies (a salesman is being a salesman?)

Please don't take this the wrong way but I couldn't care less whether or not you are being scammed or mislead. You can and should come to your own conclusions on what you want to purchase for your vehicle independent of my opinion of your choices and independent of what I want to purchase for my vehicle.

What I clicked here to find was the data that has been requested multiple times by multiple forum members that would substantiate the fuel system claims. The first post in this thread listed a series of numbers. Then a few days later all those numbers changed, did you catch that? I noticed. Now a couple weeks later still nothing to support the revised numbers posted. One forum member requested a log of the low and high fuel pressures using this solution and that seemed a reasonable piece of data to request. In my opinion if you are going to say something flows X% better than something else then a MINIMUM amount of data to support that would be in house (e.g. biased) bench test results.

Please don't take this the wrong way but I couldn't care less whether or not you are being scammed or mislead. You can and should come to your own conclusions on what you want to purchase for your vehicle independent of my opinion of your choices and independent of what I want to purchase for my vehicle.

What I clicked here to find was the data that has been requested multiple times by multiple forum members that would substantiate the fuel system claims. The first post in this thread listed a series of numbers. Then a few days later all those numbers changed, did you catch that? I noticed. Now a couple weeks later still nothing to support the revised numbers posted. One forum member requested a log of the low and high fuel pressures using this solution and that seemed a reasonable piece of data to request. In my opinion if you are going to say something flows X% better than something else then a MINIMUM amount of data to support that would be in house (e.g. biased) bench test results.

None taken about scammed/not scammed. Indeed that is up to me, and indeed you should not care. However, this is in contrast to the efforts you're making to publicize your discontent, which is a lot more than simply asking for data.

You're not being concise. Let me help you. Is this what you want?

1: Volume flow rate of the upgraded system
2: Precisely what pressures the different fuel pumps run at

Shiv has a history of not being super fast with data coming out, and, much like the single turbo kit, data tends to trickle out. It is rash to attribute this to malice or shady salesmanship. The proper way to handle this is to be patient and occasionally ask for updates. I never understand why a perceived lack of data always has to be a conspiracy. He'll probably get around to it, as every sponsor on this forum has done, eventually. Until then, you're filibustering. :P

Please don't take this the wrong way but I couldn't care less whether or not you are being scammed or mislead. You can and should come to your own conclusions on what you want to purchase for your vehicle independent of my opinion of your choices and independent of what I want to purchase for my vehicle.

What I clicked here to find was the data that has been requested multiple times by multiple forum members that would substantiate the fuel system claims. The first post in this thread listed a series of numbers. Then a few days later all those numbers changed, did you catch that? I noticed. Now a couple weeks later still nothing to support the revised numbers posted. One forum member requested a log of the low and high fuel pressures using this solution and that seemed a reasonable piece of data to request. In my opinion if you are going to say something flows X% better than something else then a MINIMUM amount of data to support that would be in house (e.g. biased) bench test results.

I think it's funny how people in this forum hate such that regardless of the data provided would contradict the facts even though they have no real world knowledge regarding pumps. They read the manufacturers spec sheet and think that provides enough information to draw conclusion. I agree the last thing people want to do is to buy into a solution without knowing if it will actually work. But, it's also unfortunate the haters will tell you not to believe in a product that does work and direct you to a diy which works as a stock replacement, but still cannot sustain the volume required due to fitting requirements that reduces the pumps efficiency. So you're left pulling your hair out and all you want at the end of the day is a solution that works .

So, last summer I installed the flex fuel and flashed my dme so I could run 100% e85. Things looked good because I just replaced my HPFP and the car pulled like a rocket... Until I tried pulling through multiple gears... I started coding after shifting from 3rd to 4th and it was my LPFP. I called Shiv and he said to wait because FFTEC was working on a solution and they just had the same issue on the flex fuel test car and the LPFP replacement didn't fix the issue. So after a few weeks, Mike from FFTEC calls and tells me I'm on the list for a pump install prior to Shift S3ctor. Trust me when I say I was a little set back about the price at first and was wondering if this would fix the issue, but after having it installed, I was able to pull 433whp on a mustang with stock turbos. Ran 1/2 mile roll ons @ Shift S3ctor without one LPFP code. So honestly the numbers are great, but regardless someone will dispute anything that is posted by Shiv just because Shiv posted it. You also have to remember, this solution came from FFTEC, not Vishnu. FFTEC has been on the scene for a long time and has produced some sick tuner cars over the years. They know how to make power, but this is a new platform and they have some really talented people. So if first hand doesn't do it for you, you're only a few hours south of me, so if you find yourself wanting to take a road trip, drop me a line and shoot up to check it out first hand. I'm running a true 80% Ethanol content and I'm hitting 21psi peak boost. Can't wait to get a set of upgraded turbos or a big single. Hope this helps, if not you're always welcome to drive up and take a look and even go for a quick ride.

I think it's funny how people in this forum hate such that regardless of the data provided would contradict the facts even though they have no real world knowledge regarding pumps. They read the manufacturers spec sheet and think that provides enough information to draw conclusion. I agree the last thing people want to do is to buy into a solution without knowing if it will actually work. But, it's also unfortunate the haters will tell you not to believe in a product that does work and direct you to a diy which works as a stock replacement, but still cannot sustain the volume required due to fitting requirements that reduces the pumps efficiency. So you're left pulling your hair out and all you want at the end of the day is a solution that works .

So, last summer I installed the flex fuel and flashed my dme so I could run 100% e85. Things looked good because I just replaced my HPFP and the car pulled like a rocket... Until I tried pulling through multiple gears... I started coding after shifting from 3rd to 4th and it was my LPFP. I called Shiv and he said to wait because FFTEC was working on a solution and they just had the same issue on the flex fuel test car and the LPFP replacement didn't fix the issue. So after a few weeks, Mike from FFTEC calls and tells me I'm on the list for a pump install prior to Shift S3ctor. Trust me when I say I was a little set back about the price at first and was wondering if this would fix the issue, but after having it installed, I was able to pull 433whp on a mustang with stock turbos. Ran 1/2 mile roll ons @ Shift S3ctor without one LPFP code. So honestly the numbers are great, but regardless someone will dispute anything that is posted by Shiv just because Shiv posted it. You also have to remember, this solution came from FFTEC, not Vishnu. FFTEC has been on the scene for a long time and has produced some sick tuner cars over the years. They know how to make power, but this is a new platform and they have some really talented people. So if first hand doesn't do it for you, you're only a few hours south of me, so if you find yourself wanting to take a road trip, drop me a line and shoot up to check it out first hand. I'm running a true 80% Ethanol content and I'm hitting 21psi peak boost. Can't wait to get a set of upgraded turbos or a big single. Hope this helps, if not you're always welcome to drive up and take a look and even go for a quick ride.

Again, I nor anyone is saying this inline pump setup doesn't work yet thats all the info we keep getting. Is that it WORKS. IT DOES WORK and I and most everyone agrees.

BUT, does it work in a superior fashion as promised, advertised, and claimed vs. the other options? That is all we need/want to know.

Again, the inline pump option works. So please, no one else post and say they have the inline pump and its working fine. That is not what is being asked.

Wait are you serious? Theoretical mathematics is more important then real world results? Talk about a backwards mentaility.

What? You do realize there is another solution that costs 1/3 as much and maxed out the HPFP right? Vishnu is claiming to outperform that solution but isn't providing any data. I just want to see data and this can be settled. Doubt its going to come from Vishnu though since after looking at the math, pump curves, and the shady flow calculations I already have a pretty good idea how that comparison is going to shake out.

Wait are you serious? Theoretical mathematics is more important then real world results? Talk about a backwards mentaility.

Wait are you serious??? Funny you word it that way considering there are millions of theories that work on paper that in fact dont prove to be laws in real world applications.

Not to mention. AGAIN there are other options out there that are being touted as inferior to this inline solution, yet there is no date to prove that claim.

When there is an option being 1/3 of the cost of the"superior" product and that "superior" bashes the other then you would expect proof. So far the "superior" product never acknowledges any factual numbers or comparisons between the two but claims to be the better option without any real world data.

This is totally not an unreasonable request. If you are looking to buy any product do you just go off of what the manufacture says or do you look at real comparisons between competing products?

None taken about scammed/not scammed. Indeed that is up to me, and indeed you should not care. However, this is in contrast to the efforts you're making to publicize your discontent, which is a lot more than simply asking for data.

You're not being concise. Let me help you. Is this what you want?

1: Volume flow rate of the upgraded system
2: Precisely what pressures the different fuel pumps run at

Shiv has a history of not being super fast with data coming out, and, much like the single turbo kit, data tends to trickle out. It is rash to attribute this to malice or shady salesmanship. The proper way to handle this is to be patient and occasionally ask for updates. I never understand why a perceived lack of data always has to be a conspiracy. He'll probably get around to it, as every sponsor on this forum has done, eventually. Until then, you're filibustering. :P

I don't think my posts are holding up judgment on this fuel system upgrade. If anything your posts are attempting delay judgment. So accusing me of filibustering maybe isn't the best analogy here. Maybe we can agree to disagree on much of this argument as we're both repeating ourselves.

In terms of what data I would like to see, it would be effective flow rates. So FFTEC would recreate the fueling system including the length and diameter of the line used, the OEM fuel pressure regulator, the much debated venturi valves, and anything else that would impact effective flow. Ideally we would have a restrictor at the end of the fuel line that matches the small inlet of the high pressure fuel pump. The test bench would be run at the OEM duty cycle and voltage. This would give us a real world test platform for the pumps beyond discussing the manufacturers open flow specifications.

Then using this test bench they would flow test an original well worn pump, a new OEM pump, a walbro pump, the walpro pump inline with the well worn OEM pump, and the walbro pump inline with the new OEM pump.

I've been staying out of these threads for the last few months, but this one is just getting out of control. I therefore feel that I should share some very pertinent information with you all:

Shiv is a N54 tuning god, get over it.

Yep, that pretty much wraps that up. Just assume the pump setup underperforms the standalone E85 pump. That's what the "theories" (reads calculations) show. The lack of data and only the existence of comments like the one above pretty much seal the deal. Ill change my mind if data comes out otherwise, but I am not holding my breath. Pretty awesome the alternative is cheaper and performs just as well if not better.

I think it's funny how people in this forum hate such that regardless of the data provided would contradict the facts even though they have no real world knowledge regarding pumps. They read the manufacturers spec sheet and think that provides enough information to draw conclusion. I agree the last thing people want to do is to buy into a solution without knowing if it will actually work. But, it's also unfortunate the haters will tell you not to believe in a product that does work and direct you to a diy which works as a stock replacement, but still cannot sustain the volume required due to fitting requirements that reduces the pumps efficiency. So you're left pulling your hair out and all you want at the end of the day is a solution that works .

To get to the heart of your argument I don't think anyone has said this inline pump solution doesn't or can't work. Your experience shows it can work. Then again maybe boosting the voltage of your OEM pump by 1 volt when at full throttle would have also worked for you.

The question with this thread would be how well does it work compared to other options. Does it live up to the promised 570lb/hr fuel flow and so forth.

Pretty awesome the alternative is cheaper and performs just as well if not better.

I just love how you and others make assumptions as if they are fact, but with no supporting evidence. We all agree the pump alone is cheaper, but how does it perform better than the same pump used by FFTEC in series with the stock pump. Your conclusion is not logical and just goes to show you have no clue as to what you're talking about with regards to this topic. So because you have clearly missed the point and have done nothing but hate on this thread because no one has really stepped up to challenge your flawed logic, please let me bring some valuable information to light because I also wanted to understand this so I did what you and every one else who questioned this solution should have done but apparently are just too lazy to do.

So with our given piping system to the HPFP on the N54, the last thing we want to increase is the restriction as this can quickly cause an increased reduction of flow. So for those who opt to just do the Walbro e85 pump upgrade, please take every step to ensure you do not increase the system restriction by using incorrect fittings and or hoses.

We know the N54 fueling system is restrictive, but without making major modifications to the fueling system, we cannot overcome the restrictions. With that said, lab testing will show that on a restricted system, pumps in series out perform a single pump by +48%. Granted, the numbers shown in the graph below are not the numbers from the fueling system on the N54, but because we don't have a lab to test that specific system, we will use this information as a guideline to show the viability of this solution over a single pump upgrade.

So even on a low restriction system, pumps in series will out perform a single pump by +17%. I think the data speaks for itself and you can find page after page of technical findings that support this solution, so I have to ask, why is everyone so bent on having FFTEC or Shiv provide R&D results that cost money and time when they can be doing something much more productive like finding a solution for the AT issues for upgraded turbo cars. So please take this with a grain of salt as I know you and the other are very knowledgeable, I just don't understand why you keep pressing the issue even though their is supporting data available everywhere you look.

What? You do realize there is another solution that costs 1/3 as much and maxed out the HPFP right? Vishnu is claiming to outperform that solution but isn't providing any data. I just want to see data and this can be settled. Doubt its going to come from Vishnu though since after looking at the math, pump curves, and the shady flow calculations I already have a pretty good idea how that comparison is going to shake out.

YEA? And? If there is a "solution" else where get it and stop trolling and following the vishnu hate camp.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBoosting

Wait are you serious??? Funny you word it that way considering there are millions of theories that work on paper that in fact dont prove to be laws in real world applications.

Not to mention. AGAIN there are other options out there that are being touted as inferior to this inline solution, yet there is no date to prove that claim.

When there is an option being 1/3 of the cost of the"superior" product and that "superior" bashes the other then you would expect proof. So far the "superior" product never acknowledges any factual numbers or comparisons between the two but claims to be the better option without any real world data.

This is totally not an unreasonable request. If you are looking to buy any product do you just go off of what the manufacture says or do you look at real comparisons between competing products?

Umm wow dude. You just agreed with me. Good job. I said to look at real word results and in the real world it works.

If you had any sort of knowledge of fueling capacity, fuel pumps, physics and mathematics you can do all the math yourself based on manufacturer data. If the said pump doesn't meet manufacturer specifications in a tested and controlled environment then take it up with the manufacturers directly aka if walbros 450lph only runs 400 lph on a test bench at the required voltage then thats not vishnus fault.

The problem with many requests in here is they are above and beyond what is expected.

I buy 50lb injectors for my mustang. Did i look at the data. Tell the manufacturer to prove it can run it on a mustang? No i put them in got the car tuned and enjoyed the car and im happy. Yet you guys piss and moan over data which you wont be able to use, understand, need, and it will never be enough. All vishnu haters are the same, just like the other guys crying there arent enough 10 second time slips. Go get your own data or suck it up and deal with the info given. If you dont like it and find a better option then go buy it.

I just love how you and others make assumptions as if they are fact, but with no supporting evidence. We all agree the pump alone is cheaper, but how does it perform better than the same pump used by FFTEC in series with the stock pump. Your conclusion is not logical and just goes to show you have no clue as to what you're talking about with regards to this topic. So because you have clearly missed the point and have done nothing but hate on this thread because no one has really stepped up to challenge your flawed logic, please let me bring some valuable information to light because I also wanted to understand this so I did what you and every one else who questioned this solution should have done but apparently are just too lazy to do.

So with our given piping system to the HPFP on the N54, the last thing we want to increase is the restriction as this can quickly cause an increased reduction of flow. So for those who opt to just do the Walbro e85 pump upgrade, please take every step to ensure you do not increase the system restriction by using incorrect fittings and or hoses.

We know the N54 fueling system is restrictive, but without making major modifications to the fueling system, we cannot overcome the restrictions. With that said, lab testing will show that on a restricted system, pumps in series out perform a single pump by +48%. Granted, the numbers shown in the graph below are not the numbers from the fueling system on the N54, but because we don't have a lab to test that specific system, we will use this information as a guideline to show the viability of this solution over a single pump upgrade.

So even on a low restriction system, pumps in series will out perform a single pump by +17%. I think the data speaks for itself and you can find page after page of technical findings that support this solution, so I have to ask, why is everyone so bent on having FFTEC or Shiv provide R&D results that cost money and time when they can be doing something much more productive like finding a solution for the AT issues for upgraded turbo cars. So please take this with a grain of salt as I know you and the other are very knowledgeable, I just don't understand why you keep pressing the issue even though their is supporting data available everywhere you look.

Thanks for posting that data. It pretty much shows that this solution is inferior to a two pump parallel configuration and most likely a single E85 pump. Two questions:

1. Does the modified N54 engine need more fuel pressure or flow?

2.a. Assuming it needs more pressure, is the stock 72psi pressure limit exceeded with this setup?
2.b. Assuming it needs more flow, using your chart above, if the motor required a hypothetical 3GPM stock and now 6.0 GPM modified, what pressure can the series setup provide?

I am genuinely interested here. We talked about this before and its starting to become comical.

To get to the heart of your argument I don't think anyone has said this inline pump solution doesn't or can't work. Your experience shows it can work. Then again maybe boosting the voltage of your OEM pump by 1 volt when at full throttle would have also worked for you.

The question with this thread would be how well does it work compared to other options. Does it live up to the promised 570lb/hr fuel flow and so forth.

It's highly possible that table changes could increase the voltage to the pump to achieve an acceptable flow rate. But even Terry recently said he hasn't done anything with regard to testing that theory. He's currently using stock table settings. So if you have a COBB AP it would be worth trying. Really depends on your setup also. Stock turbos and e85 it might do the trick. Not sure what will happen with e85 and RB turbos. FFTEC could be the only option unless someone comes up with another inline booster that is e85 compatible. Let us know if you try this. Would be interesting to see what you come up with.

Thanks for posting that data. It pretty much shows that this solution is inferior to a two pump parallel configuration and most likely a single E85 pump. Two questions:

Where? In what twisted universe does a single walbro 450 pump outflow a walbro 450 paired in series with any other pump? Really now, that's seriously argumentative. I thought we covered this topic on page 2? How can you arrive at a completely opposite conclusion to the info that's posted in the reply you quoted? It's even written in the upper right corner of the chart.
Please edit your post and I'll do the same with this post.

Thanks for posting that data. It pretty much shows that this solution is inferior to a two pump parallel configuration and most likely a single E85 pump. Two questions:

1. Does the modified N54 engine need more fuel pressure or flow?

2.a. Assuming it needs more pressure, is the stock 72psi pressure limit exceeded with this setup?
2.b. Assuming it needs more flow, using your chart above, if the motor required a hypothetical 3GPM stock and now 6.0 GPM modified, what pressure can the series setup provide?

I am genuinely interested here. We talked about this before and its starting to become comical.

Only in a low restriction situation is parallel more efficient. So in both states, series out performs a single pump, so I'm not sure what you are looking at to make the assumption a single e85 pump is more efficient than a stock pump with an e85 pump in series? There is a point on the system curve based on a sliding restriction level that series and parallel perform at the same level, but still out perform a single pump. In our setup, parallel is not really an option without major modification. That's why series makes more sense even if the system has a low restriction.

I think you'll find that flow (volume) is required to support the HP level and demand the car is making on the fuel system at peak demands. So, run two pumps in series or increase the voltage and drive the single pump harder. We know the booster pump works, now it's only a matter of testing the replacement pump to see if upping table values will achieve your goals.

If you upgrade, keep is informed on how this are working out and what changes you needed to make.

Hey Dave. Hope all is well. Can't PM anymore so I have to once in awhile. Guess I shouldn't post naked art on this forum, apparently Jason wasn't too happy. Got myself in trouble. Happy New Year btw. Look forward to hang'n out again soon. Don't forget, you still have an outstanding UOME $$$. BTW, I charge interest. For every month UOME, you have to let me use your Porsche for 1 day.

I don't think my posts are holding up judgment on this fuel system upgrade. If anything your posts are attempting delay judgment. So accusing me of filibustering maybe isn't the best analogy here. Maybe we can agree to disagree on much of this argument as we're both repeating ourselves.

It's pretty clear that you've been free to judge this whole time. No one is stopping you from posting. I'm encouraging specificity. Attributing malice to the creator of the fuel system due to a lack of desired data is filibustering. We will definitely not agree on that point, it seems.

Quote:

In terms of what data I would like to see, it would be effective flow rates. So FFTEC would recreate the fueling system including the length and diameter of the line used, the OEM fuel pressure regulator, the much debated venturi valves, and anything else that would impact effective flow. Ideally we would have a restrictor at the end of the fuel line that matches the small inlet of the high pressure fuel pump. The test bench would be run at the OEM duty cycle and voltage. This would give us a real world test platform for the pumps beyond discussing the manufacturers open flow specifications.

Then using this test bench they would flow test an original well worn pump, a new OEM pump, a walbro pump, the walpro pump inline with the well worn OEM pump, and the walbro pump inline with the new OEM pump.

This is *might* be a good setup, money being no object. Which manufacturers of upgraded fuel pump systems run this kind of platform? How much do those systems cost? Which cars are they used for? Your emphasis of salesmanship vs. data implies to me that you are used to a much higher standard.

I am unaware of other tuners for the 335i being this thorough, outside of, maybe, Dinan and HPF? Their systems are also much more expensive. It's probably a good balance between quality and price. Take a hint from SpaceX. It's cheaper to test a few times and fail than to spend excessive amounts of money ensuring it doesn't.